Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx

Sheet1Name:Management Program Rubric for Annotated
BibliographyExemplary LevelAccomplished LevelDeveloping
LevelBeginning LevelScore10%8%5%<4%CompletionStudent
included the required amount and type of sources.Student
includes most of the required amount and type
ofsources.Student included at least half of the required amount
and type of sources.Student does includes less than half of the
assignment requirement.Exemplary LevelAccomplished
LevelDeveloping LevelBeginning
LevelScore10%8%5%<4%Summary and SignificanceEach
source has a summary of the article and a paragraph describing
the applicability of the article to the student's paper.Most
sources have a summary of the article and a paragraph
describing the applicability of the article to the student's
paper.Half of the sources have a summary of the article and a
paragraph describing the applicability of the article to the
student's paper. OR The student may have included only a
summary or only a paragraph of applicability to the paper for
each source.Less than half the required information is included.
The information presented may be lacking in depth to
sufficiently summarize or present article
applicability.Exemplary LevelAccomplished LevelDeveloping
LevelBeginning LevelScore20%15%10%<9%Argument and
Synthesis of Knowledge The argument builds logically upon the
thesis with research-based, discipline-appropriate supporting
facts, evidence, and/or data.
Student clearly describes major methodologies and practices of
the field and implements them in creative and innovative ways.
The writing demonstrates the ability to interpret, analyze, and
synthesize information to advance the argument.

Minor gaps in logic and argument may appear. Supporting facts,
evidence, and/or data are evident.
Student describes major methodologies and practices of the
field accurately, uses them appropriately in the project.
The writing demonstrates the ability to interpret and analyze
information to support the argument.
Logical arguments may be one-sided, or incomplete, or may be
based on inadequate sources.
Student describes major methodologies and/or practices of the
field, but may have some omissions or problems in
implementation (such as using an adequate methodology, rather
than an exemplary one).
The writing demonstrates the ability to summarize information
that supports the argument.
Fuzzy logic may be evident and adequate supporting evidence is
lacking.
Student's work does not accurately or thoroughly describe the
major methodologies and practices of the field, may implement
them inappropriately.
The writing demonstrates the ability to refer to external

information with limited ability to support the argument.
Exemplary LevelAccomplished LevelDeveloping
LevelBeginning LevelScore20%15%10%<9%Sources and
SupportStudent communicates, organizes and synthesizes
complex and contradictory information from multiple sources to
advance knowledge in the discipline at a professional level.
Student accurately quotes, paraphrases, and cites information in
ways that are true to the original context with no errors.
Student clearly and effectively communicates, organizes and
synthesizes complex and contradictory information from
multiple sources to advance knowledge in the discipline.
Student quotes, paraphrases and cites information correctly and
consistently, using information in ways that are true to the
original context, with minimal errors.
Student communicates results from various sources, but the
information is not clearly and effectively communicated or does
not advance knowledge in the discipline.
Student quotes, paraphrases and cites information mostly
correctly and consistently, in ways that are largely true to the
original context.
Student does not adequately communicate, organize and/or
synthesize information from sources and/or does not advance
knowledge in the discipline.
Student quotes, paraphrases and cites information but may have
many errors or use the information out of context.
LevelBeginning LevelScore10%8%5%<4%OrganizationThe
writing flows smoothly and logically from a well-defined thesis.
There is a coherence in each sentence and paragraph that relates
clearly to the controlling idea using appropriate examples. The
flow of information demonstrates logical reasoning without
jumps or shifts. The writing contains a thorough introduction,

body sections, conclusion, and smooth transitions.The writing is
organized logically and flows well. Paragraphs are organized to
fit the type of essay being written. The writing discusses each
controlling idea using appropriate examples. The flow of
information demonstrates logical reasoning with minor jumps or
shifts. The writing contains an appropriate introduction, body
sections, conclusion, and transitions. The writing demonstrates
rudimentary organization and logical structure, but ideas may be
more fully developed and supported by more appropriate
evidence.
Paragraphs are somewhat organized to fit the type of essay
being written. The writing discusses the controlling idea using
prescribed resources or examples. The writing contains a basic
introduction and body sections, but may be missing a
conclusion. There may be repetition of thought or ideas. The
coherence at times is choppy or flat.
The writing is noticeably lacking in organization.
Paragraphs are somewhat organized, at least by shape, to fit the
type of essay being written. However, the writing lacks
discussion of the proposed controlling idea. There may be
repetition of thought or ideas.
The writing contains some elements of the introduction and
body sections, but may be missing a conclusion. Transitions are
not evident.
LevelBeginning LevelScore10%8%5%<4%StyleThe writing
engages the reader through an original prose style appropriate to
the subject. Language is precise and uses terminology
appropriate to the discipline. All sentences are solid and reflect
mature writing. Variety in sentence structure contributes to the
logical flow and enhances readability. Active voice and passive
voice are used appropriately for the subject matter. The writing
keeps the reader’s attention through a carefully crafted prose
style. Language chosen is appropriate to the discipline, but may
have minor errors in using terminology. Sentences are strong in
thought construct. Variety in sentence structure contributes to

the logical flow. Active voice and passive voice are typically
used appropriately for the subject matter.The writing is clear
but could be expressed in a terminology more appropriate to the
subject. Sentences are sometimes nonstandard or included
fragments/run-ons. There is limited use of sentence variety for
logical flow. Active voice and passive voice are used
inconsistently. The writing lacks clarity and is sometimes
confusing. The language chosen is not appropriate to the subject
nor the assignment. Sentences are often nonstandard and
included fragments and run-ons. There is no evidence of
sentence variety used for logical flow. Active voice and passive
voice are used inconsistently. Exemplary LevelAccomplished
LevelDeveloping LevelBeginning
LevelScore10%8%5%<4%Grammar and MechanicsThe writing
is free of proofreading errors. The writing contains sentences
that are always complete and grammatically correct, and free of
confusion and ambiguity.
The writing may exhibit a few minor errors in proofreading, but
they do not impair the flow of the reading. The writing contains
sentences that are complete or which imply unstated
connections and/or conclusions. The writing could benefit from
additional proofreading, as some errors impede the flow of the
reading. The writing contains some grammatical errors easily
corrected. Additional proofreading would help eliminate
errors.The writing exhibits substantial errors in proofreading.
The writing is confusing and ambiguous owing to substantial
errors of grammar and syntax. There is no evidence of
proofreading, editing, or rewriting.Exemplary
LevelAccomplished LevelDeveloping LevelBeginning
LevelScore10%8%5%<4%FormattingStudent provides a high-
caliber, correctly formatted assignment in the assigned citation
style. All citations in the text and in the references are
accurately cited in the appropriate style.Assignment presents an
above-average use of formatting skills with few errors in
citation style.

Most citations in the text and in the references are accurately
cited in the appropriate style.
Appearance of final assignment demonstrates the student's
limited ability to use appropriate citation style formatting.
Some citations in the text and in the references are accurately
Appearance of the final assignment is distracting. The number
of citation style formatting errors impedes easy reading.
Few citations in the text and in the references are accurately
Total Score out of 1000.0Overall Comments or Notes:
Cari Kenner,
Jason Weinerman
Adult Learning
Theory:
Applications to
Non-Traditional
College Students
Introduction
Alexis graduated from high school
but lacked the financial resources to go to college. Instead, she
went to
work in a local machine shop working on a punch press
machine. Dur-
ing the recent recession, her employer went out of business and
she
lost her job. While she quickly mastered the repetitive skills
involved
in managing her press machine, this employment experience did
not
provide her with the critical thinking skills and particular

analytical
ability that would be required in the collegiate environment. A
few
weeks into her first semester, Alexis realized the learning skills
that
were effective in her former job may not be as effective in the
academic
environment. College was going to be a challenge and she was
not sure
even how to start to adapt.
While Alexis is not a real student, she is a composite of many
of the
adult learners that enter today’s higher education community.
These
new adult learners bring learning styles and life experiences
that may
either be critical foundations for future success or deeply
entrenched be-
liefs that hinder learning in the academic environment. As adult
learners
enroll in their entry level courses, college instructors will need
to real-
ize that these adult learners differ from the traditional college
student.
Although these differences present challenges for educators,
they also
provide opportunities for educators to embrace the life
experiences and
wisdom that these adult learners bring to the collegiate
community.
Adult Learning Theory 87
JCRL FoRUM

88 Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), Spring 2011
While adult learners can be classified in many ways, this piece
will
focus on how best to understand and teach entry-level adult
learners
who are between the ages of 25 and 50, have a high school
diploma or
a GED, are financially independent, and have one semester or
less of
college-level coursework.
Three main groups of students lead the charge in the growing
number
of adult learners entering college developmental education
courses:
(a) workers who have lost their jobs because of the recession of
2008
and who require developmental coursework to refresh their
entry level
collegiate skills, (b) veterans returning from Afghanistan and
Iraq who
delayed their education to serve in the armed forces (Katapos,
2009), and,
(c) adults who have just completed their GED and are moving
onto higher
education classes (“GED classes,” 2009). By understanding
what makes
adult learners different from traditional students, developmental
educators
can provide specific tools that help adult learners integrate into
the college
or university environment and increase their chances for
success.

Horn’s (1996) ranking of students on a scale from minimally
non-
traditional to highly nontraditional recognizes the challenges
facing adult
learners, such as Alexis, who move into higher education. Older
students
(those more than 25 years) generally have at least four non-
traditional
factors: financial independence, full-time employment,
dependents, and
part-time enrollment. Therefore, many older students fall into
Horn’s
highly nontraditional category, placing them at significant risk
for not
completing their degree (Lane, 2004).
Andragogy and Adult Learning Theory
Much adult learning theory comes from the organizational
develop-
ment (OD) field where the focus on learning theory is seen as a
way
of providing employees with the tools they needed to perform
better
in the workplace. In the 1950s and 1960s, OD practitioners
created
new learning models because traditional higher education
pedagogical
models did not translate well into the workplace training
environment.
OD practitioners coined the term andragogy to recognize the
needs and
features of this distinct learning population and to separate
adult learn-
ing theory from traditional pedagogy (Knowles, 1974). Building

upon
theories from organizational development, Knowles identified
four
principles that characterize adult learners:
a. They are self directed, take responsibility for their own
actions, and resist having information arbitrarily imposed
on them.
b. They have an extensive depth of experience, which serves as
a
critical component in the foundation of their self identity.
c. They are ready to learn. As most adult learners return to
college voluntarily, they are likely to actively engage in
the learning process.
d. They are task motivated. Adult students returning to
college attend for a specific goal and the primary com-
ponent of their motivational drive tends to be internal
(Knowles, 1984).
In addition to the four principles put forth by Knowles, adult
learners
may have an established life context that determines their
learning.
The adult learner is also likely to desire a greater sense of
cooperation
between the student and teacher as they proceed through the
educa-
tional process (Zmeyov, 1998). Additionally, returning veterans
may

bring additional skills such as a higher level of maturity and a
different
understanding of world affairs and geopolitics than traditional
students
(Byman, 2007).
Adult Learning Strategy and Theory
Schraw and Moshman (1995) lay out three metacognitive
frameworks
that identify how people structure their own learning theories.
These
three frameworks are tacit theory, informal theory, and formal
theory. For
educators who have adult learners in their classes,
understanding tacit
theory and informal theory is useful for identifying how adult
learners
learn and for creating course material that can address
deficiencies
that arise from these metacognitive frameworks. Academic
experts use
the formal theory when they apply complex theoretical
frameworks to
generate new knowledge (Schraw and Moshman, 1995). As
formal theory
is rare and only found within the higher realms of academic
expertise,
it will not be discussed further in this article.
Tacit theory frames the acquisition of metacognitive skills as
occurring
without any specific learning framework. According to tacit
theory, adult
learners acquire their metacognitive skills from peers, teachers,
and the

local culture. Adult learners likely have these skills deeply
ingrained
into their conceptual framework, which may make it difficult
for them
to change, regardless of the degree of error resulting from a
flawed
tacitly-developed learning theory (Guzzetti, Snyder, Glass, &
Gamas,
1993). These deeply embedded metacognitive skills can be
particularly
detrimental during the early phases of the adult learners’
transition
to the academic environment. For example, Alexis’ technique of
rote
memorization and exacting repetition was not conducive to
classes
where she was expected to use critical thinking skills and arrive
at her
own conclusions. Another example of tacit theory is the
adoption of role
models. Adult learners who are successful in their home
community
have likely patterned their behavior on successful members in
their
peer group. However, incorporating the characteristics of these
com-
munity role models into the academic environment can create
stress,
particularly if the role model is indifferent or antagonistic
towards
the pursuit of higher education. For example, if adult learners

come
from a community that lacks respect for authority figures, they
will
have difficulty submitting to the authority of the instructor and
can
be disruptive in class.
One step up the formalization chain of individual metacognitive
theory is informal theory, describing the learner as possessing
some
recognition of metacognition. Individuals who use informal
theory still
acquire their metacognitive skills over time from their peers and
their
environment, but they have at least a rudimentary conscious
thought
process regarding their metacognitive framework (Schraw &
Moshman,
1995). For adult students, much of their informal metacognitive
strategies
develop in workplace environments, where metacognitive
development
is recognized by their peers as a sign of wisdom, which brings
together
intelligence, experience, and reflection (Prewitt, 2003). An
example of
this informal theory of metacognition is career advancement for
many
trade and blue collar employees. Individuals in these
professions may
use the informal theory of metacognition by recognizing and
linking
their behavior to the reward system of the workplace.
Theory to Practice
One of the challenges for nontraditional students is a high

attrition
rate. Studies indicate that one component leading to this high
attrition
rate is the lack of successful integration of the nontraditional
student
into the collegiate environment (Andres & Carpenter, 1997;
Sandler,
1999; Weldman, 1985). Because integration into the academic
environ-
ment is a challenge for adult students, developmental educators
must
understand the background of adult students and develop a
curriculum
that addresses their particular needs. By having an awareness of
the
different learning styles of adult learners, framing learning
strategies
in immediately useful ways, and using competition and
repetition, the
developmental educator can enhance the integration of the adult
learner
into the collegiate environment.
Awareness
Adult learners beginning their post secondary education are
likely
to have a gap in their academic development process.
Depending on
how long it has been between the time they graduated from high
school
or earned their GED and their first day of college or university,
this

gap could be significant. Instead of continuing to acquire
academic
knowledge and skills, they have increased the development of
practical
knowledge in the workplace, which Sternberg and Caruso
(1985) define as
“procedural knowledge that is useful in one’s everyday life” (p.
134).
While this practical knowledge is useful in navigating daily life,
it
likely proves inadequate in meeting the specific challenges of
the
academic environment. Nonetheless, these practical knowledge
learning strategies have proven successful during the adult
learners’
professional careers and they are part of the students’ psyche
and
self perception. By having an awareness that adult learners may
be
using tools that, while useful in their daily lives, are
inappropriate for
acquiring academic knowledge, the developmental educator can
be
mindful of the frustration adult learners may experience as they
fail to
incorporate material presented in the traditional academic
fashion. For
example, in the case of Alexis, she required practical knowledge
that
allowed her to learn how to do a repetitive task the same way
every
time. However, collegiate level coursework requires adult

learners to
explore different ways for examining and incorporating
information.
Alexis quickly learned that there was only one way to use her
machine
press. Deviations from this one correct way resulted in a
deformed
product that was not acceptable. Her workplace environment
quickly
provided her with the practical knowledge to succeed at her
specific
task. When students like Alexis are encouraged to explore
different
aspects of a problem, they may get frustrated because they are
used
to the one correct answer, even when there are often multiple
correct
answers, depending on the conditions.
Entry level coursework can provide activities for adult learners
to
compare academic and non-academic knowledge. For example,
an as-
signment in a developmental writing class that has students
compare the
content and style of writing in a professional machine
operator’s manual
with the content and style of writing in an academic textbook
allows
adult learners to use their practical knowledge in a positive
analytical
context. Specific questions that can encourage adult learners to
com-
pare their practical knowledge with the skills needed in their
academic
career can include analyzing citation usage in academic writing

but not
in professional memos and the role of first person in different
writing
forms. Other material that can be presented in this framework
include
introducing the role of bias and informational versus persuasive
writing
styles. These additional assignments can demonstrate that not
all writ-
ten material needs to be taken as the ultimate truth. While a
machine’s
operational manual is expected to be correct for the particular
machine,
other forms of writing are not subject to the same exacting
standards.
By learning that they can critically examine the written word
and form
their own opinions, adult learners will be empowered to take a
more
active role in the learning process.
Framing
As adult learners are likely to be more task and goal-oriented
(Knowles, 1984), it is important to frame their reintroduction to
collegiate learning in such a way that they can see the benefits
as
directly relating to their academic careers. Introducing theories
with-
out making a direct connection to the adult learners’ current
course

load can result in frustration if they don’t see the relevance of
the
new learning strategy. If strategies learned in developmental
educa-
tional coursework prove useful in processing the material they
learn
in their other courses, adult learners are likely to be more
accepting
of the strategies.
Incorporating textbooks and material from other courses into
the
developmental education curriculum can be a strong tool for
encour-
aging the adult learner to see an immediate benefit of
developmental
learning strategies. If students are enrolled in a developmental
reading
course, having them use a textbook from one of their other
courses is a
powerful cue for showing how the concepts learned in
developmental
reading translate into other courses.
Another useful technique for framing a learning strategy is to
indicate
that these learning tools are not exclusive and can be adapted to
meet
their individual needs and styles. For adult learners in a
developmental
reading class, letting them know that they may not find every
technique
useful for every project allows the adult learners to adapt the
material
in a way that is most useful for them. By learning that they can
select

which tools work and which tools do not, adult learners can
better utilize
their self-directed study style to achieve greater success.
Finally, a detailed syllabus that creates a direct step-by-step
descrip-
tion of how the class will proceed should be attractive to goal-
oriented
adult learners. By identifying how each class develops from the
previous
class and builds into the next class, educators can show a clear
linkage
of tasks. One technique that has proven effective is to simplify
complex
tasks into smaller components. While the concept of writing an
essay
can be formidable, breaking the assignment down into discrete
tasks
makes the process more manageable. Using separate learning
modules
for teaching skills such as developing a thesis statement,
identifying
supporting points, crafting effective introductions and
conclusions, and
effectively proofreading can be particularly useful for adult
learners who
prefer to monitor measurable progress.
Competition and Repetition
Adult learners returning to the academic field will come with
established metacognitive strategies. Many, if not all, of these

strategies
may not be conducive to collegiate learning and, in some cases,
may
be detrimental (Sternberg & Caruso, 1985). The longer adult
learners
have been away from the academic environment, the more
deeply
ingrained these strategies will be and the more difficult they
will be to
dislodge. To dislodge these ineffective strategies, it is critical
to provide
new strategies in such a way that they are in direct competition
with
the adult learners’ existing strategies. For example, the
technique behind
reading a college textbook is very different from the adult
learners’ exist-
ing skills involved in non-academic reading. Many adult
learners will
be familiar with reading newspapers, technical or operational
manuals,
reports, or popular novels. However, the reading skills for these
tasks
may not translate to the skills needed for reading a textbook or
other
academic work. Therefore, the more complex strategies
involved in
textbook reading must directly identify the skills of non-
academic read-
ing, challenge these previous skills, and present more effective
skills
for reading a textbook. Asking questions about the purpose
behind read-
ing the textbook and being transparent as to how the learner will
be
assessed in the understanding of that textbook can be directly

compared
with the skills required for reading an operational or technical
manual.
In a technical manual, practical knowledge is clearly tested
when the
specific component or activity does not work. However, with
textbook
knowledge, understanding may not be as clearly assessed
because
students can still proceed with the course even if they continue
to lack
fundamental knowledge.
Because adult learners may not be aware they have existing
learning
strategies, using learning self assessment protocols, such as the
Learning
and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), can help adult learners
realize
they may have established, although unstated, learning
preferences. By
understanding their existing learning preferences, adult learners
can
compare the new study strategies taught in the developmental
courses
with their previous learning models. Since many adult learners
will have
models based on practical knowledge from workplace
environments, the
newer models should prove superior in the academic
environment.
Traditional students will have existing metacognitive strategies;
how-
ever, these strategies may lack development, which can make
them more

subject to modification. In contrast, adult learners may have
developed
metacognitive strategies that have worked in their practical
lives, making
them more resistant to change. Repetition is critical, especially
if the
repetition forces competition between new strategies and the
adult
learners’ existing strategies. When using repetition, it will be
important
to present the information in similar but not duplicate
environments.
For example, if students are working on a time management
exercise
in a study strategies class, the initial exercise may look at
dedicating
more time to subjects that are difficult. A second exercise that
would
reinforce the time management information would be to present
a situ-
ation balancing family commitments with school commitments.
Instead
of looking at spending more time on difficult subjects, the
students are
presented with an assignment where they look at balancing their
time
between academic and non-academic events. In this way, adult
learners
can begin to see that the information presented in one situation
can be
modified and used in alternate situations, which strengthens the

course
material and enhances its competitive ability with already
established
metacognitive strategies.
Conclusion
Developmental educators can use several strategies to help adult
learners integrate into their new collegiate environment. Adult
learners
tend to be more self-directed and task or goal-oriented than
traditional
students (Knowles, 1984), so it is important to frame learning
strategies
in a way that allows adult learners to see the purpose of the
exercises;
otherwise, adult learners may resist new strategies.
Developmental
educators will need to present new strategies and techniques in
a way
that competes with the already ingrained strategy. In partnership
with
the competition approach, the educator of adult students will
need to
incorporate repetition, with variety, so that the adult learners
test new
strategies to test its usefulness. Adult learners generally have
had some
level of success in their non-academic lives and they can
replicate this
success in their academic endeavors if they understand the
benefits of
new strategies rather than seeing new material as an
introductory hoop
leading to their true goals.

Because these particular students face challenges as they
attempt to
integrate into the traditional student body, developmental
educators
should embrace the adult learners’ differences and see them as
people
who will actively embrace the concept of higher education.
With the
recent downturn in the economy, employers seek a more
educated
workforce. Thus, adult learners want to be in the classroom and
it is
incumbent on the developmental educator to help them with
their
transition into academia.
References
Andres, L., & Carpenter, S. (1997). Today’s higher education
students: Issues of admission,
retention, transfer, and attrition in relation to changing student
demographics. Vancouver:
Centre for Policy Studies in Education, University of British
Columbia.
Byman, D. (2007). Veterans and colleges have a lot to offer
each other. Chronicle of Higher
Education, 54(16), B5. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.

GED classes being deluged as unemployed seek new skills.
(2009). Community College
Week, 21(15), 3-4. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
database.
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S.
(1993). Promoting conceptual
change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional
interventions from
reading education and science education. Reading Research
Quarterly, 28(2), 116-159.
Horn, L. J., & Carroll, C. D. (1996). Nontraditional
undergraduates: Trends in enrollment
from 1986 to 1992 and persistence and attainment among 1989-
90 beginning postsecondary
students. Postsecondary education descriptive analysis reports.
Statistical analysis report. (No.
NCES-97-578) Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Katopes, P. (2009). Veterans returning to college aren’t victims,
they’re assets. Community
College Week, 21(15), 4-5. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
Knowles, M. S. (1974). Human resources development in OD.
Public Administration Re-
view, 34(2), 115-123.

Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco,
CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.
Lane, K. (2004). Sen. Clinton Unveils Plan to Help
Nontraditional Students. Black Issues in
Higher Education, 21(2), 6. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
Prewitt, V. R. (2003). The constructs of wisdom in human
development and consciousness.
(ED475466).
Sandler, M. (1999, November). A structural model of student
integration, finances, behavior,
and career development: An elaborated framework of attitudes
and persistence. Paper pre-
sented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study
of Higher Education,
San Antonio, TX.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories.
Educational Psychology Review,
7(4), 351-371.
Sternberg, R. J., & Caruso, D. R. (1985). Practical modes of
knowing. In Eisner, E. W.
(Ed.), Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing (pp. 133-
158). Chicago, IL, University

of Chicago Press.
Weldman, J. C. (1985, April). Retention of nontraditional
students in postsecondary education.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Education Research Associa-
tion, Chicago, IL.
Zmeyov, S. I. (1998). Andragogy: Origins, developments and
trends. International Review
of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für
Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale
De l’Education, 44(1), 103-108.
Cari Kenner teaches Reading and Study Strategies and Power
Reading at St. Cloud
State University. She received her master’s degree from the
University of Texas in
Brownsville and her doctorate degree from the University of
Houston. She specializes in
curriculum development and the incorporation of new
technologies into teaching.
Jason Weinerman is an adjunct instructor and teaches courses in
political science and
critical thinking at Anoka Ramsey Community College, Ashford
University, and Axia

College. He received his master’s degree in Public
Administration from the University
of Baltimore and is currently working on his doctorate in
Higher Administration from
St. Cloud State University. He specializes in adult learning
theory and the integration
of critical thinking within college coursework.
Copyright of Journal of College Reading & Learning is the
property of College Reading & Learning
Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to
multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.
Cari Kenner,
Jason Weinerman
Adult Learning
Theory:
Applications to
Non-Traditional
College Students
Introduction
Alexis graduated from high school

but lacked the financial resources to go to college. Instead, she
went to
work in a local machine shop working on a punch press
machine. Dur-
ing the recent recession, her employer went out of business and
she
lost her job. While she quickly mastered the repetitive skills
involved
in managing her press machine, this employment experience did
not
provide her with the critical thinking skills and particular
analytical
ability that would be required in the collegiate environment. A
few
weeks into her first semester, Alexis realized the learning skills
that
were effective in her former job may not be as effective in the
academic
environment. College was going to be a challenge and she was
not sure
even how to start to adapt.
While Alexis is not a real student, she is a composite of many
of the
adult learners that enter today’s higher education community.
These
new adult learners bring learning styles and life experiences
that may
either be critical foundations for future success or deeply
entrenched be-
liefs that hinder learning in the academic environment. As adult
learners
enroll in their entry level courses, college instructors will need
to real-
ize that these adult learners differ from the traditional college
student.

Although these differences present challenges for educators,
they also
provide opportunities for educators to embrace the life
experiences and
wisdom that these adult learners bring to the collegiate
community.
JCRL FoRUM
While adult learners can be classified in many ways, this piece
will
focus on how best to understand and teach entry-level adult
learners
who are between the ages of 25 and 50, have a high school
diploma or
a GED, are financially independent, and have one semester or
less of
college-level coursework.
Three main groups of students lead the charge in the growing
number
of adult learners entering college developmental education
courses:
(a) workers who have lost their jobs because of the recession of
2008
and who require developmental coursework to refresh their
entry level
collegiate skills, (b) veterans returning from Afghanistan and
Iraq who
delayed their education to serve in the armed forces (Katapos,

2009), and,
(c) adults who have just completed their GED and are moving
onto higher
education classes (“GED classes,” 2009). By understanding
what makes
adult learners different from traditional students, developmental
educators
can provide specific tools that help adult learners integrate into
the college
or university environment and increase their chances for
success.
Horn’s (1996) ranking of students on a scale from minimally
non-
traditional to highly nontraditional recognizes the challenges
facing adult
learners, such as Alexis, who move into higher education. Older
students
(those more than 25 years) generally have at least four non-
traditional
factors: financial independence, full-time employment,
dependents, and
part-time enrollment. Therefore, many older students fall into
Horn’s
highly nontraditional category, placing them at significant risk
for not
completing their degree (Lane, 2004).
Andragogy and Adult Learning Theory
Much adult learning theory comes from the organizational
develop-
ment (OD) field where the focus on learning theory is seen as a
way
of providing employees with the tools they needed to perform
better

in the workplace. In the 1950s and 1960s, OD practitioners
created
new learning models because traditional higher education
pedagogical
models did not translate well into the workplace training
environment.
OD practitioners coined the term andragogy to recognize the
needs and
features of this distinct learning population and to separate
adult learn-
ing theory from traditional pedagogy (Knowles, 1974). Building
upon
theories from organizational development, Knowles identified
four
principles that characterize adult learners:
a. They are self directed, take responsibility for their own
actions, and resist having information arbitrarily imposed
on them.
b. They have an extensive depth of experience, which serves as
a
critical component in the foundation of their self identity.
c. They are ready to learn. As most adult learners return to
college voluntarily, they are likely to actively engage in
the learning process.
d. They are task motivated. Adult students returning to
college attend for a specific goal and the primary com-
ponent of their motivational drive tends to be internal
(Knowles, 1984).

In addition to the four principles put forth by Knowles, adult
learners
may have an established life context that determines their
learning.
The adult learner is also likely to desire a greater sense of
cooperation
between the student and teacher as they proceed through the
educa-
tional process (Zmeyov, 1998). Additionally, returning veterans
may
bring additional skills such as a higher level of maturity and a
different
understanding of world affairs and geopolitics than traditional
students
(Byman, 2007).
Adult Learning Strategy and Theory
Schraw and Moshman (1995) lay out three metacognitive
frameworks
that identify how people structure their own learning theories.
These
three frameworks are tacit theory, informal theory, and formal
theory. For
educators who have adult learners in their classes,
understanding tacit
theory and informal theory is useful for identifying how adult
learners
learn and for creating course material that can address
deficiencies
that arise from these metacognitive frameworks. Academic
experts use
the formal theory when they apply complex theoretical
frameworks to
generate new knowledge (Schraw and Moshman, 1995). As

formal theory
is rare and only found within the higher realms of academic
expertise,
it will not be discussed further in this article.
Tacit theory frames the acquisition of metacognitive skills as
occurring
without any specific learning framework. According to tacit
theory, adult
learners acquire their metacognitive skills from peers, teachers,
and the
local culture. Adult learners likely have these skills deeply
ingrained
into their conceptual framework, which may make it difficult
for them
to change, regardless of the degree of error resulting from a
flawed
tacitly-developed learning theory (Guzzetti, Snyder, Glass, &
Gamas,
1993). These deeply embedded metacognitive skills can be
particularly
detrimental during the early phases of the adult learners’
transition
to the academic environment. For example, Alexis’ technique of
rote
memorization and exacting repetition was not conducive to
classes
where she was expected to use critical thinking skills and arrive
at her
own conclusions. Another example of tacit theory is the
adoption of role
models. Adult learners who are successful in their home
community

have likely patterned their behavior on successful members in
their
peer group. However, incorporating the characteristics of these
com-
munity role models into the academic environment can create
stress,
particularly if the role model is indifferent or antagonistic
towards
the pursuit of higher education. For example, if adult learners
come
from a community that lacks respect for authority figures, they
will
have difficulty submitting to the authority of the instructor and
can
be disruptive in class.
One step up the formalization chain of individual metacognitive
theory is informal theory, describing the learner as possessing
some
recognition of metacognition. Individuals who use informal
theory still
acquire their metacognitive skills over time from their peers and
their
environment, but they have at least a rudimentary conscious
thought
process regarding their metacognitive framework (Schraw &
Moshman,
1995). For adult students, much of their informal metacognitive
strategies
develop in workplace environments, where metacognitive
development
is recognized by their peers as a sign of wisdom, which brings
together
intelligence, experience, and reflection (Prewitt, 2003). An

example of
this informal theory of metacognition is career advancement for
many
trade and blue collar employees. Individuals in these
professions may
use the informal theory of metacognition by recognizing and
linking
their behavior to the reward system of the workplace.
Theory to Practice
One of the challenges for nontraditional students is a high
attrition
rate. Studies indicate that one component leading to this high
attrition
rate is the lack of successful integration of the nontraditional
student
into the collegiate environment (Andres & Carpenter, 1997;
Sandler,
1999; Weldman, 1985). Because integration into the academic
environ-
ment is a challenge for adult students, developmental educators
must
understand the background of adult students and develop a
curriculum
that addresses their particular needs. By having an awareness of
the
different learning styles of adult learners, framing learning
strategies
in immediately useful ways, and using competition and
repetition, the
developmental educator can enhance the integration of the adult
learner
into the collegiate environment.
Awareness

Adult learners beginning their post secondary education are
likely
to have a gap in their academic development process.
Depending on
how long it has been between the time they graduated from high
school
or earned their GED and their first day of college or university,
this
gap could be significant. Instead of continuing to acquire
academic
knowledge and skills, they have increased the development of
practical
knowledge in the workplace, which Sternberg and Caruso
(1985) define as
“procedural knowledge that is useful in one’s everyday life” (p.
134).
While this practical knowledge is useful in navigating daily life,
it
likely proves inadequate in meeting the specific challenges of
the
academic environment. Nonetheless, these practical knowledge
learning strategies have proven successful during the adult
learners’
professional careers and they are part of the students’ psyche
and
self perception. By having an awareness that adult learners may
be
using tools that, while useful in their daily lives, are
inappropriate for

acquiring academic knowledge, the developmental educator can
be
mindful of the frustration adult learners may experience as they
fail to
incorporate material presented in the traditional academic
fashion. For
example, in the case of Alexis, she required practical knowledge
that
allowed her to learn how to do a repetitive task the same way
every
time. However, collegiate level coursework requires adult
learners to
explore different ways for examining and incorporating
information.
Alexis quickly learned that there was only one way to use her
machine
press. Deviations from this one correct way resulted in a
deformed
product that was not acceptable. Her workplace environment
quickly
provided her with the practical knowledge to succeed at her
specific
task. When students like Alexis are encouraged to explore
different
aspects of a problem, they may get frustrated because they are
used
to the one correct answer, even when there are often multiple
correct
answers, depending on the conditions.
Entry level coursework can provide activities for adult learners
to
compare academic and non-academic knowledge. For example,
an as-
signment in a developmental writing class that has students
compare the

content and style of writing in a professional machine
operator’s manual
with the content and style of writing in an academic textbook
allows
adult learners to use their practical knowledge in a positive
analytical
context. Specific questions that can encourage adult learners to
com-
pare their practical knowledge with the skills needed in their
academic
career can include analyzing citation usage in academic writing
but not
in professional memos and the role of first person in different
writing
forms. Other material that can be presented in this framework
include
introducing the role of bias and informational versus persuasive
writing
styles. These additional assignments can demonstrate that not
all writ-
ten material needs to be taken as the ultimate truth. While a
machine’s
operational manual is expected to be correct for the particular
machine,
other forms of writing are not subject to the same exacting
standards.
By learning that they can critically examine the written word
and form
their own opinions, adult learners will be empowered to take a
more
active role in the learning process.

Framing
As adult learners are likely to be more task and goal-oriented
(Knowles, 1984), it is important to frame their reintroduction to
collegiate learning in such a way that they can see the benefits
as
directly relating to their academic careers. Introducing theories
with-
out making a direct connection to the adult learners’ current
course
load can result in frustration if they don’t see the relevance of
the
new learning strategy. If strategies learned in developmental
educa-
tional coursework prove useful in processing the material they
learn
in their other courses, adult learners are likely to be more
accepting
of the strategies.
Incorporating textbooks and material from other courses into
the
developmental education curriculum can be a strong tool for
encour-
aging the adult learner to see an immediate benefit of
developmental
learning strategies. If students are enrolled in a developmental
reading
course, having them use a textbook from one of their other
courses is a
powerful cue for showing how the concepts learned in
developmental
reading translate into other courses.
Another useful technique for framing a learning strategy is to

indicate
that these learning tools are not exclusive and can be adapted to
meet
their individual needs and styles. For adult learners in a
developmental
reading class, letting them know that they may not find every
technique
useful for every project allows the adult learners to adapt the
material
in a way that is most useful for them. By learning that they can
select
which tools work and which tools do not, adult learners can
better utilize
their self-directed study style to achieve greater success.
Finally, a detailed syllabus that creates a direct step-by-step
descrip-
tion of how the class will proceed should be attractive to goal-
oriented
adult learners. By identifying how each class develops from the
previous
class and builds into the next class, educators can show a clear
linkage
of tasks. One technique that has proven effective is to simplify
complex
tasks into smaller components. While the concept of writing an
essay
can be formidable, breaking the assignment down into discrete
tasks
makes the process more manageable. Using separate learning
modules
for teaching skills such as developing a thesis statement,
identifying
supporting points, crafting effective introductions and
conclusions, and
effectively proofreading can be particularly useful for adult

learners who
prefer to monitor measurable progress.
Competition and Repetition
Adult learners returning to the academic field will come with
established metacognitive strategies. Many, if not all, of these
strategies
may not be conducive to collegiate learning and, in some cases,
may
be detrimental (Sternberg & Caruso, 1985). The longer adult
learners
have been away from the academic environment, the more
deeply
ingrained these strategies will be and the more difficult they
will be to
dislodge. To dislodge these ineffective strategies, it is critical
to provide
new strategies in such a way that they are in direct competition
with
the adult learners’ existing strategies. For example, the
technique behind
reading a college textbook is very different from the adult
learners’ exist-
ing skills involved in non-academic reading. Many adult
learners will
be familiar with reading newspapers, technical or operational
manuals,
reports, or popular novels. However, the reading skills for these
tasks
may not translate to the skills needed for reading a textbook or
other

academic work. Therefore, the more complex strategies
involved in
textbook reading must directly identify the skills of non-
academic read-
ing, challenge these previous skills, and present more effective
skills
for reading a textbook. Asking questions about the purpose
behind read-
ing the textbook and being transparent as to how the learner will
be
assessed in the understanding of that textbook can be directly
compared
with the skills required for reading an operational or technical
manual.
In a technical manual, practical knowledge is clearly tested
when the
specific component or activity does not work. However, with
textbook
knowledge, understanding may not be as clearly assessed
because
students can still proceed with the course even if they continue
to lack
fundamental knowledge.
Because adult learners may not be aware they have existing
learning
strategies, using learning self assessment protocols, such as the
Learning
and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), can help adult learners
realize
they may have established, although unstated, learning
preferences. By
understanding their existing learning preferences, adult learners
can
compare the new study strategies taught in the developmental
courses

with their previous learning models. Since many adult learners
will have
models based on practical knowledge from workplace
environments, the
newer models should prove superior in the academic
environment.
Traditional students will have existing metacognitive strategies;
how-
ever, these strategies may lack development, which can make
them more
subject to modification. In contrast, adult learners may have
developed
metacognitive strategies that have worked in their practical
lives, making
them more resistant to change. Repetition is critical, especially
if the
repetition forces competition between new strategies and the
adult
learners’ existing strategies. When using repetition, it will be
important
to present the information in similar but not duplicate
environments.
For example, if students are working on a time management
exercise
in a study strategies class, the initial exercise may look at
dedicating
more time to subjects that are difficult. A second exercise that
would
reinforce the time management information would be to present
a situ-

ation balancing family commitments with school commitments.
Instead
of looking at spending more time on difficult subjects, the
students are
presented with an assignment where they look at balancing their
time
between academic and non-academic events. In this way, adult
learners
can begin to see that the information presented in one situation
can be
modified and used in alternate situations, which strengthens the
course
material and enhances its competitive ability with already
established
metacognitive strategies.
Conclusion
Developmental educators can use several strategies to help adult
learners integrate into their new collegiate environment. Adult
learners
tend to be more self-directed and task or goal-oriented than
traditional
students (Knowles, 1984), so it is important to frame learning
strategies
in a way that allows adult learners to see the purpose of the
exercises;
otherwise, adult learners may resist new strategies.
Developmental
educators will need to present new strategies and techniques in
a way
that competes with the already ingrained strategy. In partnership
with
the competition approach, the educator of adult students will
need to
incorporate repetition, with variety, so that the adult learners

test new
strategies to test its usefulness. Adult learners generally have
had some
level of success in their non-academic lives and they can
replicate this
success in their academic endeavors if they understand the
benefits of
new strategies rather than seeing new material as an
introductory hoop
leading to their true goals.
Because these particular students face challenges as they
attempt to
integrate into the traditional student body, developmental
educators
should embrace the adult learners’ differences and see them as
people
who will actively embrace the concept of higher education.
With the
recent downturn in the economy, employers seek a more
educated
workforce. Thus, adult learners want to be in the classroom and
it is
incumbent on the developmental educator to help them with
their
transition into academia.
References
Andres, L., & Carpenter, S. (1997). Today’s higher education
students: Issues of admission,
retention, transfer, and attrition in relation to changing student

demographics. Vancouver:
Centre for Policy Studies in Education, University of British
Columbia.
Byman, D. (2007). Veterans and colleges have a lot to offer
each other. Chronicle of Higher
Education, 54(16), B5. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
GED classes being deluged as unemployed seek new skills.
(2009). Community College
Week, 21(15), 3-4. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier
database.
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S.
(1993). Promoting conceptual
change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional
interventions from
reading education and science education. Reading Research
Quarterly, 28(2), 116-159.
Horn, L. J., & Carroll, C. D. (1996). Nontraditional
undergraduates: Trends in enrollment
from 1986 to 1992 and persistence and attainment among 1989-
90 beginning postsecondary
students. Postsecondary education descriptive analysis reports.
Statistical analysis report. (No.
NCES-97-578) Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Katopes, P. (2009). Veterans returning to college aren’t victims,
they’re assets. Community
College Week, 21(15), 4-5. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
Knowles, M. S. (1974). Human resources development in OD.
Public Administration Re-
view, 34(2), 115-123.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco,
CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.
Lane, K. (2004). Sen. Clinton Unveils Plan to Help
Nontraditional Students. Black Issues in
Higher Education, 21(2), 6. Retrieved from Academic Search
Premier database.
Prewitt, V. R. (2003). The constructs of wisdom in human
development and consciousness.
(ED475466).
Sandler, M. (1999, November). A structural model of student
integration, finances, behavior,
and career development: An elaborated framework of attitudes
and persistence. Paper pre-
sented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study
of Higher Education,
San Antonio, TX.

Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories.
Educational Psychology Review,
7(4), 351-371.
Sternberg, R. J., & Caruso, D. R. (1985). Practical modes of
knowing. In Eisner, E. W.
(Ed.), Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing (pp. 133-
158). Chicago, IL, University
of Chicago Press.
Weldman, J. C. (1985, April). Retention of nontraditional
students in postsecondary education.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Education Research Associa-
tion, Chicago, IL.
Zmeyov, S. I. (1998). Andragogy: Origins, developments and
trends. International Review
of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für
Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale
De l’Education, 44(1), 103-108.
Cari Kenner teaches Reading and Study Strategies and Power
Reading at St. Cloud

State University. She received her master’s degree from the
University of Texas in
Brownsville and her doctorate degree from the University of
Houston. She specializes in
curriculum development and the incorporation of new
technologies into teaching.
Jason Weinerman is an adjunct instructor and teaches courses in
political science and
critical thinking at Anoka Ramsey Community College, Ashford
University, and Axia
College. He received his master’s degree in Public
Administration from the University
of Baltimore and is currently working on his doctorate in
Higher Administration from
St. Cloud State University. He specializes in adult learning
theory and the integration
of critical thinking within college coursework.
Copyright of Journal of College Reading & Learning is the
property of College Reading & Learning
Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to
multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 14,
No. 1, February 2014, pp. 95 - 108.
doi: 10.14434/josotl.v14i1.3943
Public deliberation as a teaching andragogy: Implications for
adult
student learning from a doctoral higher education policy course
Matthew Johnson1, Margaret Partlo2, Tammy Hullender2,
Emmanuel Akanwa2, Heather
Burke2, Jerry Todd2, and Christine Alwood2
Abstract: Public deliberation provides an inclusive and robust
mechanism for
making shared decisions in community and political settings;
however, its
application to teaching and learning remains underutilized
(McMillan &
Harriger, 2007). This manuscript reports on a case study of the
use of public
deliberation as a teaching andragogy in a doctoral-level course
in higher
education policy, which showed that public deliberation creates
greater
ownership of the course, fosters critical thinking and student
agency, and
implicates taking action.
Keywords: Public deliberation, adult learners, andragogy,
graduate students,
higher education policy

Introduction
Public deliberation allows participants to make shared decisions
about complicated
societal issues in community and political settings. Models for
public deliberation vary, but
developing citizens’ voices and creating a shared sense of
responsibility and action are central to
the process. The Deliberative Democracy Handbook (Melville,
Willingham, & Dedrick, 2006)
posits five characteristics of public deliberation: (1) including
all voices, not just experts, (2)
equal opportunity for participation, (3) creating or using choice
work to make decisions, (4)
including diverse stakeholders, and (5) seeking common ground.
These characteristics
distinguish public deliberation from other forms of discussion,
which may have similar or
contrasting attributes or aims. Public deliberation specifically
differs from the other forms of
discussion by first promoting understanding of complicated
topics where unclear agreement
currently exists and then collectively deciding what action
should be taken. By finding and
building upon the strengths, rather than the weaknesses within
the opinions expressed by others,
participants suspend judgment in favor of finding common
ground, consider the tradeoffs of
proposed actions, and decide how to act.
While there are many forms of public deliberation, the specific
form of public
deliberation used in the current study most closely mirrors the

National Issues Forum (NIF)
model (nifi.org). The NIF is a non-partisan network of
individuals and organizations that
advocate for increased citizen participation in public
deliberation. The NIF model requires the
creation of an issue book to engage stakeholders in a
deliberation around a topic or issue of
public concern. Issue books contain two main parts – naming
and framing. The naming portion
of the issue book requires the authors to name an issue of public
concern in a way that requires
citizens to act. The naming section provides an overview of the
problem, contains several
strategic facts, and articulates the parameters of the problem.
Issues for public deliberation lack
1 Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership, Central
Michigan University, [email protected]
2 Doctoral Student, Central Michigan University
Johnson, M., Partlo, M., Hullender, T., Akanwa, E., Burke, H.,
Todd, J., & Alwood, C.
No. 1, February 2014.
josotl.indiana.edu
96
clear answers or technical solutions; rather, they require
thinking about issues in complex ways
and broad-based action.
Once an issue is named, three or four options to address the

problem are created, in the
framing section. Each option is distinct from the others and
represents a set of related possible
actions to address the issue. Additionally, each approach
contains a set of related tradeoffs that
might accompany action items. During the subsequent issue
forum to deliberate the topic using
the issue book, trained moderators, who act as neutral parties,
guide participants through the
issue guide by asking questions and encouraging participants to
think critically about the issue
and possible approaches suggested. Moderators help pace the
deliberations so that each approach
receives equal consideration. Moderators also facilitate group
follow-up and potential future
meetings.
The lead author of this paper, a higher education instructor in a
graduate program, was
familiar with public deliberation in community settings, but less
familiar with its applications to
the classroom. In preparing to teach a doctoral-level higher
education policy course, two
dynamics were important in considering the course’s design.
First, he wanted students to have a
sense of ownership and responsibility over the myriad, complex
issues inherent to higher
education policy. He sought to avoid focusing only on the role
of state and federal policymakers
and intellectualized learning about higher education policy.
Second, he wanted to engage the
affective domains embedded in higher education policy
alongside the cognitive domains that
tend to dominate policy discourse. Higher education is a deeply
held value in American society,
and people often have strong emotions toward issues of access,

cost, choice, aid, and
accountability. For these reasons, he decided to use public
deliberation as an andragogy (i.e.,
teaching strategies for adult learners) in the course. A more
thorough description of the course
and study are presented in the methods section.
Literature Review
Public Deliberation Overview
Melville et al. (2006) described public deliberation as a process
encouraging reflection
and critical discourse through civic engagement. Participants in
public deliberation work
collaboratively toward solutions as the deliberative process
informs and inspires voice and
consensus building (Muse, 2009). Promoted by the National
Issues Forum since 1981 as a form
of democratic action, public deliberation is an effective method
to resolve community issues that
require participant involvement in order to influence change
(nifi.org).
Public deliberation provides a framework to resolve issues in
which participant
involvement generates interest in sustainable change. The
deliberative process emphasizes
participant action rather than reaction and, when used in public
forums, develops openness to the
views of others. Deliberation also promotes informed
consensus, when applied to local
environmental issues (Daniels & Walker, 1996; Harris, Nielsen,
Becker, Blahna, & McLaughlin,
2012), participant involvement in community healthcare forums
(Downey, Anyaegbunam, &

Scutchfield, 2009; Lehoux, Daudelin, & Abelson, 2012) and
developing standards for emerging
technologies (Hamlett, 2003).
The use of public deliberation in higher education requires a
shift from a teaching
paradigm to a learning paradigm (Barr & Tagg, 1995). This
transition requires teachers to move
from simply providing instruction and delivering content to the
more complex endeavor of
josotl.indiana.edu
97
facilitating learning and empowering students to take charge of
their learning (Barr & Tagg,
1995). Adopting a learning paradigm in the classroom has been
shown to increase student
engagement and student outcomes (Brank & Wylie, 2013;
Nikitina; 2010). Public deliberation as
a teaching andragogy aligns with the learning paradigm as the
teacher acts as a guide through the
public deliberation process as opposed to delivering content
about the process to students.
Students undertake a process of discovery and have significant
latitude to name and frame
options about a public issue in the deliberation process
(Melville et al., 2006). In the deliberation

process, students work alongside teachers to engage in
reflective, often transformational,
dialogue in which they gain self-awareness and discover
multiple possibilities for collective
action (Diaz & Gilchrist, 2010; Waghid, 2006).
Deliberation on College Campuses
The use of public deliberation on college campuses is not
widespread (Dedrick, Grattan,
& Dienstfrey, 2008), despite its implicit connections to the
learning paradigm (Barr & Tagg,
1995) and demonstrated effectiveness as a tool for making
decisions (Walters, 2008). Those
institutions utilizing public deliberation tend to concentrate
deliberations within campus
programs, between the campus and the community, or within
administrative and governance
structures (Diaz & Gilchrist, 2010). Diaz and Gilchrist contend
that, within these settings, public
deliberation addressed timely issues of diversity and social
justice, encouraged peer mediation,
resulted in more inclusive procedural processes, and promoted
active civic engagement. Through
this collaborative and inclusive approach, student perspectives
are shared and promoted which
facilitates conversation toward understanding. By modeling
democratic processes, students gain
understandings and experience in mutually resolving real world
problems, rather than debating
them (McMillan & Harriger, 2007). Diaz and Gilchrist (2010)
add that this type of dialogue is
the foundation for public deliberation and that such dialogue
promotes student participation and
empowerment through shared experiences and exposure to a

variety of perspectives, not just
those of experts. McMillan and Harringer (2007) emphasized
that, through deliberative activities,
students learn to become active and engaged participants in the
democratic processes that occur
on campus and nearby communities.
Walters (2008) added that public deliberation can assist
institutions of higher learning in
transformational change when embedded throughout the college
experience. His study revealed a
campus-wide shift from teaching to learning following the
implementation and expansion of
deliberative practices over an eight-year period. Students
demonstrated greater flexibility,
engagement, and community skills, and were more likely to
challenge themselves and others.
While not entirely attributable to public deliberation on campus,
Walters noted an enhanced
learning environment and increased enrollment and public
recognition.
Within the classroom, deliberation has been shown to be an
effective mechanism to
achieve higher-order critical thinking skills (McMillan &
Harriger, 2007; Waghid, 2006).
Through deliberation in classroom settings, students are forced
to consider conflicting opinions,
diverse options for action, and must synthesize multiple voices
(Diaz & Gilchrist, 2010), which
have been shown to bolster student learning (Broadbear, 2012).
Public deliberation allows
students to experience real world situations from within the
classroom setting. Through the
public deliberation process, students reflect upon educational
problems, gain a better
understanding of complex problems, and work toward making
informed choices about possible

lines of action to solve educational problems (Waghid, 2006).
josotl.indiana.edu
98
In a comprehensive study of 30 undergraduate students using
public deliberation over
four years at Wake Forest University, McMillan and Harriger
(2007) offer the most
comprehensive data on how deliberation affects college
students. Their longitudinal study
showed that students were more involved in traditional venues
of political action outside of
service, attuned to the responsibilities of active citizenship,
analytical and critical of political
processes and their role in them, efficacious in their political
attitudes and language, communal
in their political language and outlook, and imaginative in
recognizing possibilities for
deliberation and applying deliberative knowledge and skills to a
broad range of situations. They
also note that despite initial hesitation concerning the
deliberative process, students experienced
a profound change in their attitudes about the process.
Other research on the impact of public deliberation in the
classroom has shown that
public deliberation led to gains in students’ interpersonal

awareness and connections with others
(Diaz & Gilchrist, 2010), content knowledge of issues (Daniels
& Walker, 1996), ability to make
informed decisions (Blomquist & Ostrom, 2008; Burgh and
Yorshansky, 2008), connections to
public issues (Diaz & Gilchrist, 2010), and group collaboration
(Dedrick et al., 2008). An
important limitation of these studies is that traditional-aged
college students were the primary
sample, thus limiting its applicability to non-traditionally-aged
populations.
Andragogical Considerations
The National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), in their
most current completed
data, reported the enrollment of adult students over the age of
25 to be nearly nine million of the
total 21 million students in higher education, equaling 43% of
all enrolled college students
(NCES, n.d.). Since 2000, the number of adults pursuing a
postsecondary education has
increased by two-and-half-million students after a decade of
consistent enrollment, a nearly 30%
increase (NCES). Soares (2013) revealed that only about 15% of
current undergraduates are
“traditional” college students; students who are 18-22 years old,
attend a four-year college full-
time, and reside on-campus. Soares (2013) adds that adult
learners are predominantly part-time
students and have significant familial, work, and time
commitments outside of taking courses.
Consequently, the necessity of catering to adult learners’ needs
is increasingly important in

higher education.
Lindeman (2011) distilled several key assumptions about adult
learners from the
literature, which constitute the foundation of adult learning
theory: Adults are motivated to learn
as they experience needs and interests that learning will satisfy,
adults’ orientation to learning is
life-centered, experience is the richest source for adult’s
learning, adults have a deep need to be
self-directed, and individual differences among people increase
with age. These key empirical
tenets of adult learners, originally conceptualized by Knowles
(1984), serve as the foundation for
understanding adult learners in the classroom. The use of public
deliberation is a useful
andragogy because it focuses on what people hold valuable,
highlighting everyone’s voice,
honoring personal experience, and creating opportunities for
self-directed learning (Melville et
al., 2006).
Methods
The research question guiding this study was, “What are
students’ experiences using
public deliberation as a teaching andragogy in the classroom?”
To better understand students’

josotl.indiana.edu
99
experiences using public deliberation as a teaching andragogy, a
qualitative case study was
employed (Stake, 1995). Case studies focus on a unit of analysis
in a real-life, contemporary
setting (Yin, 2008). The purpose of this study was to examine
adult learners’ experiences using
public deliberation as a teaching andragogy in a single course,
which suggests the presence of a
bounded system (Stake, 1995). Eleven students were part of the
course, of which nine elected to
participate in the study. Students were part of a doctoral
program in higher education
administration at a mid-sized, public, four-year university in the
Midwest. Students were a mix
of full-time and part-time doctoral students. Each student
identified as an adult learner. The
course was taught by an Assistant Professor of Educational
Leadership. Constituting the sole
assignment for the course, students were charged with creating
a deliberative issue book
reflective of the NIF issue books that named and framed a
higher education policy issue for
public deliberation. Students worked in self-selected small
groups, two to four students,
designing the issue book on a higher education topic of their
choosing. The students addressed
timely issues such as college access, internationalization, and
undocumented students. Each
group produced a 10-17 page issue booklet that presented, in

detail, a definition of the problem
(naming), possible courses of action, and the potential tradeoffs
of each (framing). As doctoral
students, connecting to the scholarly literature in the naming
and framing was required. Upon
completion of the issue booklet, students facilitated a public
deliberation forum in class. Steps
for the deliberation process were provided by the instructor and
based upon National Issues
Forums moderator guides (www.nifi.org). These guides outline
the role of the moderator,
provide steps to moderating a forum, and offer helpful tips on
how to moderate a forum to keep
the discussion moving and focused on the issue. At the end of
the semester, the instructor
administered an open-ended, five-question survey (see
Appendix) to the students through a
survey tool on Blackboard Learn. Surveys were anonymous to
encourage honest feedback about
students’ experiences. The survey asked students to
retroactively assess their initial attitudes
toward the course and the public deliberation process as the
primary teaching andragogy in
addition to the project and their final overall experiences using
public deliberation in the course.
Data Analysis
To analyze the survey data, two members of the research team
independently coded the
transcripts using both open and axial coding (Strauss & Corbin,
1990), which allowed for an in-
depth examination of each line of text. Similar concepts and

ideas from those initial open codes
were then grouped to form themes. To develop analytic
triangulation, Patton (2002) argued that
when more than one researcher codes data, researchers should
first work independently to
develop codes and then meet as a group to compare and contrast
their interpretations. When
independent axial codes were combined into themes, two
members of the research team met to
build consensus on themes and findings. Additionally,
participants also served as authors in this
manuscript, which provided a source of member checking
(Patton, 2002). Students were
encouraged to correct misinterpretations of data in the
manuscript. Inductive analysis (Patton,
2002) was used to forefront students’ experiences using public
deliberation. Letting the patterns,
themes, and categories emerge from the data allowed for a more
robust understanding of students’
experiences.
josotl.indiana.edu
100
Results

Results of this study yielded five important themes regarding
adult students’ experiences
using public deliberation in the classroom: students experienced
initial nervousness, hesitancy
with group projects, an understanding of multiple perspectives,
an ability to weigh tradeoffs, and
an increase in student agency. Each theme is discussed
individually, followed by implications for
practice and research.
Initial Nervousness
When students learned about deliberation on the first night of
class, each expressed a
cautious excitement that contained some elements of
nervousness. Since deliberation was
unfamiliar to them, their nervousness was palpable. One student
remarked, “I was nervous, and
what was going through my mind all through the class period
was ‘how different this assignment
would be.’” Another student admitted a strong feeling of being
“overwhelmed.” Since the class
used a public deliberation andragogy throughout the semester,
students were concerned with an
unfamiliar andragogy as the basis for the entire course. More
than simply the foundation of the
course, public deliberation would also constitute the primary
source of students’ grades. Many
students remarked that because this process was so unfamiliar to
them, and that it would
determine their entire grade, they were uneasy. “To be
completely honest, there were some

mixed emotions about having this project be the foundation for
my entire grade,” one student
admitted. Unfamiliarity with the andragogy coupled with the
group nature of the public
deliberation project caused trepidation and nervousness for each
student. These feelings may be
interpreted in the light of Knowles’ (1984) principle that adult
learners must see the utility in
their learning to be motivated to learn. An unfamiliar
andragogy, such as public deliberation,
initially challenged students’ ability to see its utility.
While all of the students indicated some level of anxiousness,
some students welcomed
the innovative andragogy. “I think what excited me most was
hearing that using public
deliberation as a learning tool had not been attempted before in
the program. I love taking part in
new learning methodologies and this sounded exciting,” one
student expressed. Another student
expressed being “up for the challenge,” which indicated that,
for at least some students, a level of
excitement lurked below the surface of their anxiousness.
Hesitancy with Group Projects
Perhaps not surprisingly, students were concerned about public
deliberation because of
the immense amount of group work involved. Naming and
framing an issue for public
deliberation and creating an issue book so others can deliberate
the issue requires sustained
interaction with a group. Many students confessed to having
relied on the “divide and conquer”
method of tackling group projects, in which students divide the
workload into smaller pieces,

work individually, and then bring their pieces back to the
collective to be integrated into the
larger project. This tried and true method did not work well for
public deliberation and presented
a challenge for the students due to the extensive commitments
outside of the class typical of
adult learners (Soares, 2013). As one student plainly stated,
With every group member having other obligations outside of
the classroom, it was
sometimes difficult to properly collaborate on ideas. For
example, if one member set
josotl.indiana.edu
101
aside four hours on a Saturday evening to work only on the
project but needed input from
the other members before he/she could proceed, but the other
members were taking care
of other obligations and couldn't respond, it could be very
frustrating for the member
trying to utilize what little free time that was available.
This student’s remarks illustrate how challenging public
deliberation can be with adult learners.
Another student reflected, “I always find group work the most
challenging. It is difficult to get so

many people together, function as a machine and produce a
quality product in such a short time.”
These two comments show that as adult learners worked to
balance multiple commitments,
spending prolonged time with group members to work through
the intricacies of naming and
framing an issue for public deliberation became challenging.
An Understanding of Multiple Perspectives
The public deliberation process allowed students to see multiple
perspectives and to
discern the grey areas in policy matters more clearly. Public
deliberation issue books usually
have three or four possible approaches to address a particular
problem, which inherently presents
multiple perspectives and avoids the illusion of “one right
answer.” As one student summarized,
“By using public deliberation, people can meet in the middle on
issues rather than feeling
obligated to choose sides.” Students were able to see multiple
points of view, what values were
associated with those views, and what courses of action were
associated with those views.
Hearing multiple perspectives made for an enjoyable
experience, as students were excited to be
part of an inclusive, thoughtful process. One student
commented, “I always find it intriguing to
hear others’ points of view and question why they feel that way
especially when I don't see
things from that point of view. It helps broaden my
perspective.”
Additionally, students remarked on how deliberation provided a

“civil” way to discuss
issues – likely contrasting dominant models of discussing
policy, which can be uncivil. As one
student noted,
[Public deliberation] can really allow people to understand the
importance of the policy
issues, and allows for civilized discussion of the possible
actions that could be taken, as
well as any trade-offs of those actions. It provides a way for
communities to realize the
values that people hold surrounding higher education and do so
in a way that makes
people want to continue to talk about them.
Another student commented, “Public deliberation is very
different from group work or large
group discussions where the loudest, most persuasive voice
usually dominates the group, or a
paper that furthers the writer’s perspective.” Public deliberation
fosters civil discussion about
issues, which helped promote students’ learning.
As students deliberated civilly about higher education policy,
they were more apt to hear
multiple voices. Hearing multiple perspectives pushed students’
thinking about higher education
policy issues out of dichotomous thinking to more nuanced
understandings. As students heard
others’ views, and had the opportunity to carefully weigh
others’ thoughts alongside their own,
students could arrive at a more sophisticated understanding of
higher education policy issues.
Students attributed public deliberation andragogy to their
increased understanding of higher
education policy. “It allowed me to internally absorb

information that I had researched and then
apply the knowledge through my writing. I felt like this allowed
me to master the material in a
way I otherwise would not have been able to.” Because students
had to present “all sides” of an
issue for the issue book, they had to actively take on those
perspectives and seek
josotl.indiana.edu
102
understanding. This resulted in an increased consideration of
the content material, which all of
the students in the study noted.
Although the research design did not allow for longitudinal
outcomes, two students
alluded to the enduring impact of deliberation. “Once a student
has participated in conducting
their own deliberation, it is difficult to see issues from only one
perspective with little regard for
the consequences of those decisions.” Another student
remarked, “This process has me thinking
about how I can use public deliberation in other areas of my
work.” These comments suggest
that the impact of students’ participating in public deliberation
may be long-term.

An Ability to Weigh Tradeoffs
In addition to presenting multiple perspectives, public
deliberation forces participants to
consider tradeoffs associated with various courses of action – a
part of deliberation that every
student in the study found valuable. For instance, for students
who might be in favor of
increasing the amount of student aid for college students, they
are forced to think through the
likely tradeoff of paying more taxes, which may or may not be a
tradeoff they are willing to
accept. Considering likely tradeoffs made students think more
deeply about the material and who
might be affected by various decisions. This gave students a
broader perspective from which to
operate and understand higher education policy.
Each of the nine students in the study mentioned the value of
weighing tradeoffs
associated with action steps. One student reflected, “Spending
the time to really think through
both the positive and negative consequences of each potential
action, through many different
lenses, helped reinforce the gravity of the issue.” Another
opined, “Public deliberation can really
allow people to understand the importance of the policy issues,
and allows for civilized
discussion of the possible actions that could be taken, as well as
any trade-offs of those actions.”
This student continued, “Weighing tradeoffs makes the issue
real because it requires a sacrifice
of some sort.” These students’ comments highlight the

importance of weighing the costs when
considering proposed courses of action. Doing so helped
students’ see the issue(s) in a more
nuanced way and provided them with a clearer understanding of
proposed action steps or
solutions.
Increased Student Agency
As students became more involved in the public deliberation
project, they developed a
sense of ownership and agency. Students reported feeling a
sense of ownership over the process
and content of the project. They felt as though what they were
doing was building their self-
efficacy and confidence to engage in higher education policy.
One student stated, “Public
deliberation as a teaching method encourages participation as
opposed to traditional teaching
methods such as lecture, group work, or an academic paper.”
Another remarked, “Having simply
discussed this in class, or written a paper on the process
wouldn't have given me confidence I
now have to go through the process in a real-life situation.”
Another student remarked, “While
there is a place for lecture within the classroom, it never
encourages the development of the
student’s perspective, a valuable piece obtained through
deliberation.” Developing students’ self-
efficacy in understanding and acting upon higher education
policy issues is a difficult feat, but
public deliberation offers an andragogy to build these
capacities. One student even remarked, “It

josotl.indiana.edu
103
felt like students were turned into teachers,” which provides
even greater evidence of how public
deliberation creates a sense of ownership and fosters student
agency.
The nature of the course is particularly important to consider.
Students commented that
higher education policy can seem distant and unapproachable.
Federal and state policies on
student loans, immigration, financial aid, or affirmative action
can feel unapproachable unless
one works in policy making. Deliberation helped students
identify ways they could affect these
issues by focusing the onus of action on them and other
stakeholders. One student simply stated,
“I had the agency to engage what concerned me most.” Since
public deliberation engages what
people hold valuable about higher education (e.g., keeping
college affordable, equality in
education), students felt more connected to the issue and were
better able to identify action steps
they could take to affect policy. One student found value in this
aspect of public deliberation:

I appreciated the opportunity to focus on topics of direct
interest to me and others in my
group. This allowed [us] to master the material and decide what
we could do. We could
establish common ground and ways we could proceed.
Finding one’s place and identifying steps for action are
important aspects of public deliberation
and students echoed their importance.
Discussion and Implications
The results of this case study hold several implications for
practice. First, public
deliberation carries considerable promise for fostering the
learning of adult students. Instructors
would likely agree that three of the five themes from this study
constitute vaunted learning
outcomes (i.e., understanding multiple perspectives, increasing
student agency, evaluating
tradeoffs associated with action). Public deliberation was shown
to help achieve these learning
outcomes, which is corroborated by other studies (Dedrick et
al., 2006; McMillan & Harriger,
2007).
In particular, public deliberation was shown to increase student
agency – an important
aspect of adult learning theory (Knowles, 1984; Lindeman,
2011). As Knowles (1984) argued,
adults have a deep psychological need to be self-directed
learners. Public deliberation inherently
requires self-directed learning, as students are responsible for
naming and framing an issue for
public deliberation. Doing so requires students to take charge of

their own learning and mutually
construct an issue book based on their groups’ understanding of
the issue. Public deliberation as
an andragogy is therefore an appropriate fit for adult learners
based on Knowles’ characteristic of
self-direction in adult learners.
Another implication for practice is that public deliberation may
be an important vehicle
for making complex content more accessible and practical for
students. Higher education policy
can feel inaccessible to students because policy is often viewed
as something elected officials or
prominent college administrators do. A new professional or
graduate student in higher education
may feel as though they do not have a role in policy matters. As
one student remarked, “Policy is
something that happens at 30,000 feet.” Public deliberation can
help students conceptualize an
issue and determine their roles in taking action. In essence,
public deliberation can be an
effective tool for affecting change and taking collective action
because it helps students better
understand the issues and places them within the issues,
therefore making action more likely.
This finding relates to Knowles’ (1984) characteristic of adult
learners possessing vast life
experiences that serve as the richest source for their learning.
Public deliberation invites students
to bring in personal experience (Melville et al., 2006), which
may help students feel more

josotl.indiana.edu
104
connected to the issue. By leveraging adult learners’ significant
life experiences, public
deliberation provides a rich opportunity to foster student
learning.
Educators may find that public deliberation provides a
framework for meaningful and
engaging group projects. As students indicated, public
deliberation requires an immense amount
of group coordination and dialogue, which fostered some initial
resistance. How does one
counter students’ apprehension of a group project, which
several adult learning theorists, such as
Brookfield (1991) and Cranton (2006), have identified as an
important pedagogical component?
These theorists suggest considering asynchronous group
projects, where students do not have to
work on a group project at the same time. Public deliberation
presents a challenge to this
suggestion because public deliberation andragogy usually
requires people synchronously
working together. Since adult learners tend to have significant
familial and career obligations
outside of school (Soares, 2013), exploring ways to facilitate
synchronous group work in public
deliberation would enhance its utility and application for adult
learners. In this study, the
instructor set aside time for students to plan, discuss, and work
together on their project. The
instructor was available to answer questions, provide direction,

and assess group dynamics
during this time.
Educators should also consider how to evaluate students’ work
on a public deliberation
project. Students in this study described considerable
apprehension about an unfamiliar
andragogy and project as the sole basis of their grade. Further,
the instructor made the
determination that students would not receive individual grades
for their work; rather, students
would receive a group grade. Public deliberation requires group
work at all levels—naming,
framing, deliberating, deciding what to do next—which begs the
question of how to separate
grading considerations. Unless there is a problematic group
member, how does one assign
different grades to students when the finished product (i.e., the
issue book) is a reflection of
hours of intense discussion and reworking of the naming and
framing? Educators could seek to
add individual reflection components or action plans to help
offset the issues that often
accompany a group grade.
Related to the prior implication of considering public
deliberation as an andragogy, a few
cautions should be heeded. First, understanding public
deliberation requires a thorough research
and reflection of the intent, process, and design. Those
interested in adopting public deliberation
in their classrooms should familiarize themselves with the
theory and process. While the process
of public deliberation helps participant’s finds common ground
for action when working with
complicated societal topics, this process may not be useful in

all classroom situations. Second,
according to a Kettering Foundation report (2011), the
deliberative process is only appropriate
when participants are aware of a problem but are unsure or
unable to identify exactly what is at
stake. Issues that are too broad, or decisions have already been
made, or the issue requires
technical or managerial solutions are also not a good fit for the
deliberative process. A sound
issue for deliberation typically centers around perspectives with
a moral or value based
foundation; such issues cannot simply be solved through
traditional classroom or community
discussion or debate. In this manner, public deliberation is
distinct from dialogue, debate, and
other forms of discussion typically used in educational settings.
The National Issues Forum
(www.nifi.org) provides a host of resources for educators
interested in public deliberation. After
gaining a more nuanced understanding of public deliberation,
educators should then determine if
public deliberation is an appropriate fit for their intended
learning outcomes.
josotl.indiana.edu
105

Limitations
Readers should consider several limitations when reflecting on
the results and
implications of this study. First, data about students’
experiences in the course were gathered at
the end of the course. Students were asked to retrospectively
assess their initial reactions to the
instructor’s use of a public deliberation andragogy and their
subsequent learning. This practice is
common in research (Creswell, 2007), but detailed reflections
throughout the course would likely
have produced more robust data. Second, two of the eleven
students in the course declined to
participate for undisclosed reasons in the research study.
Having their voices reflected in this
research would have provided a more complete picture of our
collective experiences, and
perhaps even provided a negative case (Stake, 1995). Finally,
the fact that time constraints did
not permit students to deliberate with members of the larger
campus or regional community
limited the impact of our collective work. Doing so would have
broadened the impact of our
work and more accurately reflected the true nature of public
deliberation (McMillan & Harriger,
2007).
Conclusion
This study explored the use of public deliberation as a teaching
andragogy. The instructor

Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx

Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx

Similar to Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx (20)

More from edgar6wallace88877

More from edgar6wallace88877 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Sheet1NameManagement Program Rubric for Annotated BibliographyEx.docx